[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:05:25] <rdieter>	KDE SIG Meeting start, who's present today?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:05:35] Thema	rdieter setzt das Kanalthema auf "KDE SIG Meeting -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2008-11-04 -- Init".
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:05:36] <svahl>	present
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:06:21] <Kevin_Kofler>	Present.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:07:57] <rdieter>	than, SMParrish, ltinkl, kde*foo: ping
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:08:23] <than>	present, but still busy with bugfixes
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:08:51] <rdieter>	ok, we'll get started slowly
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:09:07] <rdieter>	first agenda item: Systray backport http://websvn.kde.org/?view=rev&revision=876362
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:09:14] Thema	rdieter setzt das Kanalthema auf "KDE SIG Meeting -- Systray backport http://websvn.kde.org/?view=rev&revision=876362".
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:09:24] <Kevin_Kofler>	jreznik has been championing for this, unfortunately he isn't present now. :-(
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:09:54] <Kevin_Kofler>	To sum up: what this is is a backport of the KDE 4.2 systray to 4.1. It entirely replaces the systray plasmoid.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:10:19] <than>	has someone tested it?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:10:50] <Kevin_Kofler>	IMHO this is far too big to solve essentially nothing (just graphical ugliness in the backgrounds of the KDE 4 systray applets), but jreznik says that bug is highly visible and so worth fixing.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:11:02] <rdieter>	prerequisites:  1.  someone to vouche to own/work-on it.    2.  test profusely locally or in a private branch, *then* we could consider it
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:11:03] <Kevin_Kofler>	Still, I think this is not a good approach to go at fixing it.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:11:39] <Kevin_Kofler>	On the other hand, the systray applet now also includes the Plasma notification stuff, so I think we'd also get prettier notification events with that backport.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:12:08] <rdieter>	is jreznik the one to be working on it then?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:12:15] <Kevin_Kofler>	Whether that makes it worthwhile, I'm not sure. I'm not in principle opposed to backports.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:12:27] <Kevin_Kofler>	jreznik is the one who wants it, so he should be the one doing the work. ;-)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:12:39] <Kevin_Kofler>	I wish he was present to discuss it...
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:12:39] <rdieter>	4.2 is just around the corner, I'm not sure if all the work would be all that worthwhile.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:13:17] <rdieter>	any disagreement with my aforementioned prerequisites?  without that, we can't even consider it, imo.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:14:06] <Kevin_Kofler>	I agree with these, we just have to tell jreznik. :-)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:15:02] <rdieter>	I'd feel a *lot* better saying we/fedora are interested in this, and our way of showing it would be to devote our developer resources to working-with/helping upstream for 4.2.x
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:15:35] <rdieter>	but, if someone (like jreznik) wants to do it now for 4.1.x backport, I'm not going to tell him what he can/can't do with his time.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:16:04] <rdieter>	brb... coffee
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:16:17] <than>	rdieter: i'm fine with it, if the backport patch works fine
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:16:19] <Kevin_Kofler>	I'd much rather someone just fixed the background issue in the 4.1 systray and we keep the new stuff for 4.2.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:16:38] <Kevin_Kofler>	I think it would just be 1 line to add, the problem is I don't know what line nor where.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:16:57] <Kevin_Kofler>	And I think nobody knows, or it would already be fixed.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:17:35] <Kevin_Kofler>	I hope the 4.2 rewrite actually fixed that issue.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:17:45] <Kevin_Kofler>	And that it didn't introduce a new one.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:17:46] <svahl>	is it possible that the mentioned new notification events would cause any problems? Or would be different in their behaviour/usuability?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:18:20] <rdieter>	svahl: that's a concern too, backports always have a danger of unforeseen interaction.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:18:22] <Kevin_Kofler>	The background drawing problems for KDE 4 applets were not there in 4.0, but 4.0 had bad backgrounds and size issues for GTK+ applets instead.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:18:46] <rdieter>	ok, I think we've beaten that to death for now, we'll discuss more with jreznik when he's avail.  move on?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:19:19] <than>	rdieter: +1
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:19:30] Thema	rdieter setzt das Kanalthema auf "KDE SIG Meeting -- Desktop User Guide".
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:19:36] <rdieter>	topic: Desktop User Guide
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:19:43] <Kevin_Kofler>	svahl: Right, the plasma notification stuff is a bit risky, it's a bit annoying that it got merged with the systray, so it isn't easily possible to backport things one at a time.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:19:44] <rdieter>	any news here?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:20:06] <Kevin_Kofler>	rdieter: None that I know of, but I must admit I haven't been following it closely.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:20:22] <rdieter>	who added it to the agenda? :)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:21:33] <Kevin_Kofler>	jreznik, according to the history.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:21:56] <rdieter>	well, any volunteer then to look over the DUG, and come back with a brief status report (after meeting, whatever)?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:22:14] <svahl>	Hasn't jreznik also volunteered to delegate the work there? Or am I wrong?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:22:39] <rdieter>	ok, we'll leave the task for him for now... let's move on for now.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:22:52] Thema	rdieter setzt das Kanalthema auf "KDE SIG Meeting -- additional packages for live images (~20 megs free)".
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:22:56] <rdieter>	topic: additional packages for live images (~20 megs free)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:23:07] <rdieter>	wee! space for more goodies.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:23:42] <Kevin_Kofler>	I'd love to put Marble on it, but 1. it isn't split from kdeedu yet (IMHO should be, also for the benefit of e.g. Digikam) and 2. I don't know how big it is.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:23:53] <svahl>	@input-methods was removed from fedora-live-base.ks, so there will be no scim-* and m17n-* for now
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:24:18] <rdieter>	Kevin_Kofler: I've been threatening to split it for awhile, I'll just do it, and we can see.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:24:50] <Kevin_Kofler>	BTW, when you tested Digikam's Marble integration, are you sure you had kdeedu installed and not just kdeedu-libs?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:24:52] <svahl>	I've done a spin with kdeedu and removed some packages for it, but it's still too big (712/717): https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=SebastianVahl/CurrentPackageList&oldid=57924
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:24:52] <rdieter>	esp for the spreading use of marble/libmarble in other apps (like digikam for now)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:25:04] <Kevin_Kofler>	Because that might explain why it had been crashing for you.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:25:09] <rdieter>	Kevin_Kofler: I'll test digikam/marble integration again, and find out
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:25:10] <Kevin_Kofler>	The Marble KPart is in kdeedu.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:25:50] <rdieter>	any other suggestions?  (It's also not a sin to not use the entire 700MB)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:26:19] <svahl>	kdeedu-math was also proposed (+ ~4 megs)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:27:01] <Kevin_Kofler>	svahl: Is that 712/717 or 612/617?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:27:20] <Kevin_Kofler>	Because the page says 612/617 which looks really low to me.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:27:34] <svahl>	Kevin_Kofler: it's a typo. both spins are over 700 megs (I've only replaced the last two diggits)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:28:07] <Kevin_Kofler>	OK, that's indeed too big.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:28:43] <Kevin_Kofler>	kdeedu-math would fit, but I'm not sure it makes much sense to specifically put these on a general-purpose spin.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:29:30] <rdieter>	oh, the kalgebra plasma applet is a must have. :)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:30:06] <rdieter>	alright, brainstorm a bit, and see if we can come up with anything else useful to add.  let's move on...
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:30:33] <rdieter>	topic: bug #468889 - libldap-2.4.so.2: undefined symbol: ldap_int_tls_destroy
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:30:35] <buggbot>	Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=468889 medium, medium, ---, jsafrane@redhat.com, ASSIGNED, libldap-2.4.so.2: undefined symbol: ldap_int_tls_destroy
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:30:43] Thema	rdieter setzt das Kanalthema auf "KDE SIG Meeting -- #468889- libldap-2.4.so.2: undefined symbol: ldap_int_tls_destroy".
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:31:04] <rdieter>	sounds like maintainer can reproduce now, but seems we're not much closer to finding a solution here.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:32:14] <Kevin_Kofler>	For the live CD size, maybe we should just keep the space reserved for localized spins?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:32:46] <svahl>	+1
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:33:51] <rdieter>	I like that too, good idea
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:33:54] <Kevin_Kofler>	About the ldap issue: Looks like libldap isn't finding its own symbols for some reason I don't understand.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:34:46] <rdieter>	join the club. :)  well, I have a hunch... I'll try a local rebuild of openldap, and see if that helps any.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:35:19] <than>	it could be a issue in linker
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:35:56] <than>	link kcm_kdm against ldap is a workaround
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:36:20] <than>	i'm not happy to do it
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:36:55] <kushal>	can we ask the upstream why they are using it ?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:37:30] <than>	the problem is that striggi_*rf* stuff needs kldap
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:37:47] <than>	and kcmshell4 kdm seems to load the plugin
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:38:02] <rdieter>	maybe a side-effect of uselessly linking openldap when not used or needed?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:38:24] <than>	rdieter: i don't think so
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:38:28] <rdieter>	ok
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:38:48] <Kevin_Kofler>	Well, it could be that not doing it "fixes" it.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:38:57] <Kevin_Kofler>	But ultimately the issue is still there.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:39:03] <rdieter>	well, direct further ideas/feedback to the aforementioned bug, and we'll keep banging away.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:39:04] <Kevin_Kofler>	It just should not happen.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:39:22] <than>	do we want the workaround?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:39:36] <Kevin_Kofler>	Which workaround?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:39:52] <than>	links kcm_kdm against ldap
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:09] <Kevin_Kofler>	We could try it.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:18] <Kevin_Kofler>	I have no idea if that will fix it though.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:19] <than>	it works,
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:24] <rdieter>	than: if the extra link helps, then we could consider it I guess... you wanna try? (if you have some spare time, that is)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:32] <than>	i already tested it
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:35] <rdieter>	oh
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:43] <rdieter>	wierd
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:45] <Kevin_Kofler>	Let's do it then as a workaround and get it tagged f10-final ASAP.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:40:59] <than>	ok
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:41:04] <Kevin_Kofler>	Then we have plenty of time to work on a proper fix.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:41:26] <Kevin_Kofler>	I don't think we should ship F10 with an avoidable bug just because we don't have the perfect solution.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:41:36] Thema	rdieter setzt das Kanalthema auf "KDE SIG Meeting -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2008-11-04 -- Open Discussion".
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:41:57] <rdieter>	that's it for the agenda, let's discuss 4.1.3 plans.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:42:40] <rdieter>	than: you proppose we ship 4.1.3 an a F10-update, right?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:43:05] <than>	rdieter: yes, it's too late and risky to have it in F10-release
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:43:36] <rdieter>	I would tend to agree ( can't believe I'm saying this, must be getting old ). :)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:43:37] <than>	so we will ship it as a F10-update
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:44:30] <rdieter>	ok, ltinkle is working on F-9 branch, you're doing F-10, either wait to commit to F-10 cvs branch or work in a private/local branch?  or ?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:44:36] <than>	lukas is working on F9
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:44:43] <rdieter>	ltinkl, sorry. :)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:45:05] <than>	we should probably create subbranch
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:45:14] <than>	and commit 4.1.3 there
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:45:42] <rdieter>	i'm ok with that
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:46:06] <than>	when the F10 is released, we can merge the changes
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:46:14] <Kevin_Kofler>	I'd rather commit 4.1.3 to the main branch and subbranch 4.1.2 stuff if needed.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:46:20] <Kevin_Kofler>	That way we don't have to merge.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:46:31] <than>	Kevin_Kofler: +1
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:46:43] <Kevin_Kofler>	But I'm not 100% sure we can build from a subbranch, I've seen the kernel folks do it in the past, but that was a long time ago.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:46:43] <rdieter>	ok, even better.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:47:45] <Kevin_Kofler>	Also Fedora's CVS probably won't make it easy to branch an old revision.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:48:26] <Kevin_Kofler>	Normally one can try and just delete the branch and start all over if it fails. But I think the pre-tag checks will block that (they definitely block deletion of non-branch tags, so I guess they'll also block deleting branches).
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:50:00] <rdieter>	any cvsadmin's present that can comment?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:50:20] <Kevin_Kofler>	I don't understand why we can't just do all operations CVS allows, but unfortunately that's not something for KDE SIG to decide.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:50:50] <Kevin_Kofler>	(I think the pre-tag checks are overly paranoid and serve no useful purpose.)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:50:50] <than>	if there's a problem i will commit in a private/local branch, i don't want to waste time here
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:51:23] <f13>	Kevin_Kofler: I likely agree with you, but instead of fixing CVS, I'd rather move to something else.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:52:04] <Kevin_Kofler>	Hmmm, actually a fairly safe way to create a subbranch retroactively would be to use CVS's feature to create a CVS branch from a tag.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:52:28] <Kevin_Kofler>	So we could create a branch starting at the tag for the last 4.1.2 build and do 4.1.2 fixes from there.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:52:47] <Kevin_Kofler>	And so safely move on to 4.1.3 stuff without worrying about branching now.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:52:55] <rdieter>	ok, we can discuss the implementation details after meeting, any other topics to discuss?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:53:35] <Kevin_Kofler>	Adding some quicklaunch icons to the panel by default?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:53:45] 	 * Kevin_Kofler always has Konqueror (web) and Konsole there. :-)
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:54:03] <svahl>	a small note for the live images again as a FYI: These packages were added after the Preview release was composed: digikam, kdeedu-kstars, konq-plugins, pavucontrol, twinkle.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:54:21] <than>	we should remove battery applet from default setting
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:54:25] <rdieter>	svahl: thanks
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:54:43] <Kevin_Kofler>	The battery applet is there by default in F10? It shouldn't...
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:54:44] <rdieter>	than: +1, we have guidance
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:54:52] <Kevin_Kofler>	It'll be something for F11 with PowerDevil.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:55:09] <than>	yes
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:55:10] <Kevin_Kofler>	But it's too late to add it for F10 (especially since a battery applet backport is needed for it to use PowerDevil).
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:55:25] <Kevin_Kofler>	So the battery applet should not be there by default.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:55:52] <than>	can someome take care of it?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:56:09] <Kevin_Kofler>	svahl: No objections to those extra apps.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:57:20] <than>	svahl: it's great you can add lancelot if there's anough space on live CD
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:57:37] <rdieter>	than: I can try, how best to implement, patching kdebase-workspace or using kde-settings somehow?
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:57:56] <Kevin_Kofler>	That's something we need to figure out.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:58:01] <than>	rdieter:  i prefer kde-settings
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:58:10] <Kevin_Kofler>	I think we have to define a complete plasma-appletsrc if we use kde-settings.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:58:10] <svahl>	than: I want to avoid packages with the same functionality. And we'll also have kickoff and simplemenu as menus
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:58:38] <rdieter>	Kevin_Kofler: that's whan I'm afraid of... I'll try tho
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:58:46] <svahl>	but if there are no other objections I could surely add it
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:58:59] <than>	svahl: thanks
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:59:03] <Kevin_Kofler>	svahl: And those are actually easily switchable, Lancelot is not (it has to be added to the panel by hand).
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:59:41] <rdieter>	thanks all, we're about out of time for today.
[Di Nov 4 2008] [17:59:47] <rdieter>	KDE SIG meeting end
[Di Nov 4 2008] [18:00:13] Thema	rdieter setzt das Kanalthema auf "Channel is used by various Fedora groups and committees for their regular meetings | Note that meetings often get logged | For questions about using Fedora please ask in #fedora | See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/FedoraMeetingChannel for meeting schedule".
[Di Nov 4 2008] [18:00:35] <svahl>	but as a positive point: lancelot is only visible in the plasmoids viewer, not in the menu. So If someone wants it he/she knows where too look. So I'll add it